72

Chapter Five

Conclusion and Recommendations

This chapter presents the writer’s reports about the effects

of peer tutoring with QUICK method and task based method to

the eleventh graders in SMA Kristen Petra 3 Surabaya. This

chapter presents the conclusion and the recommendations that

the writer gets from the research.

Conclusion

The objective of this study was to compare the significant

difference of peer tutoring with QUICK method and task based

method on students’ reading comprehension. The minor

objective of this study was to analyze which teaching reading

comprehension method gives the students better effects on the

students reading comprehension achievement. The writer used

peer tutoring with QUICK method which was applied to the

experimental group. The writer used task based method which

is used by English teachers in SMA Kristen Petra 3. This study

showed that task based method gave the eleven graders

improvement in reading comprehension achievement. Indeed

peer tutoring with QUICK method is quite effective to give the

students to scaffold their reading comprehension. The peer

tutoring with QUICK method was able to give the experimental

73

students to be critical in reading and more critical in thinking

(Paul & Elder, 2006).

From the independent samples t-test, the test proved that

task based method constantly gave better effects on the

students reading comprehension achievement than peer

tutoring with QUICK method. The independent samples t-test

proved that the mean difference of the t-test for equality was in

– 2.750 which meant that the difference between peer tutoring

with QUICK method and task based method were around -

2.750. The finding of independent t-test presented that the

alternative hypothesis was -2.75 < .05 and this value showed a

negative relationship between peer tutoring with QUICK

method and task based method. The findings proved that task

based method gave better effects than peer tutoring with

QUICK method. Based on the findings of independent samples

t-test, the reason of peer tutoring with QUICK method showed

less progress than task based method; it was because the peer

tutoring with QUICK method was conducted for the first time.

Both of the teacher and the students need more improvement in

the each step of peer tutoring with QUICK method. However in

the paired samples t-test showed a good significant difference

on the students’ reading comprehension achievement in before

and after the treatments.

74

The reason why task based method showed better effects on

students’ reading achievement is because the creative tasks

developed the students’ attention and the students’ language

development. Through creative tasks, students are supported to

scaffold their cognitive and their affective since the students

focus on the teacher’s instructions. The creative tasks help the

students focus on the instructions so they do the tasks easily.

Task based method helps the students understand the reading

passage by instructions from the teacher (Pools-m, 2014).

During the process of teaching reading, the students follow the

instructions from the teacher in order to focus on the form of

language use and to do the tasks easily. While in peer tutoring

with QUICK method, students are demanded to have critical

reading and critical thinking to comprehend the reading text.

Those need time for the students to comprehend the reading

text even the quality and the effectiveness of teaching and

learning are increasing (Topping & Hill, 1996).

Recommendations

This study needs more improvement in peer tutoring with

QUICK method and task based method. Therefore, the writer

has some recommendations for future researches and for

teachers concerning the field of teaching reading.

75

Recommendations for Future Researches

1. It is recommended to have further research concerning peer

tutoring with QUICK method and task based method. There

are some internal and external validity that have influenced

the treatments in the experimental research.

2. It is more valid and more accurate if the treatments should

be implemented longer to show the significant differences

of using peer tutoring with QUICK method and task based

method because the treatments were conducted only for

four times.

3. The findings of the calculations of t-test need to be

improved in this research if this experimental research will

be applied in more than four time treatments.

4. The research should have more populations to improve the

accuracy of the research findings.

Recommendations for Teachers

1. It is recommended that peer tutoring with QUICK method

and task based method are used as the teachers’ teaching

variation in their reading classes in order to avoid the

students to feel bored in the reading class.

2. It is recommended for teachers who develop peer tutoring

with QUICK method and task based method in their

reading classes in order to increase students’ reading

76

achievement in their critical reading and their critical

thinking.

3. It is recommended for teachers that using peer tutoring with

QUICK method in reading classes to develop students’

cognitive interaction and social interaction between tutors

and tutees to help bridge the achievement gap (Lague &

Wilson, Peer Tutors Improve Reading Comprehension,

2011).

Bibliography

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning,

Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of

Educational Objectives. (A. &. Bacon, Ed.) Boston, MA:

Pearson Education Group.

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). Teaching and assessing: A

revision of Bloom's taxonomy of education objectives. In L.

Anderson, & D. Krathwohl, A taxonomy for learning (p. 29).

New York: Longman.

Armbuster, B., Anderson, T., Armstrong, J., Wise, M., & Janisch, C.

L. (1991). Reading and Questioning in Content Area Lessons.

Retrieved from www.jlr.sagepub.com

Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive Skills and Reading.

Illonois: University of Illonois.

Becker, L. (2000, April 10). Analysis of Pretest and Posttest Scores

with Gain Scores and Repeated Measures. Retrieved from

www.uccs.edu/becker/gainscore.html

Becker, L. A. (2000, March 21). Analysis of Pretest and Posttest

Scores with Gain Scores and Repeated Measures. Retrieved

from Effect Size Calculator Lee Becker:

http://www.uccs.edu/lbecker/gainscore.html

Bellini, J., & Rumrill, P. (2009). Research in Rehabilitation

Couseling a Guide to Design, Methodology and Utilization.

Springfield Illinois: Charles C Thomas Publisher.

Berg, R. G. (2014, September 16). Association Tests: Two Variables.

Retrieved from SPSS Tutorials: http://www.spss-

tutorials.com/spss-independent-samples-t-test/

Berman, H. (2016). Hypothesis Test: Difference Between Means.

Retrieved from Stat Trek: http://stattrek.com/m/hypothesis-

test/difference-in-means.aspx

Biddix, J. P. (2009). How To Determine T-test. Research Rundowns.

Retrieved from https:researchrundowns.wordpress

Casper, M., Catton, J., & Westfall, S. (1998, October 2).

Comprehension: Theories and Strategies. Retrieved October

2, 1998, from Dominican University of California:

http://www.dominician.edu

Chard, D. (2008). What is Reading Comprehension and Why is it

Important? Building Community of Reading Expert, 1-12.

Chia, T. H. (2007). A Cooperative Task Based Learning Approach

To Motivating Low Achieving Readers of English in

Taiwanese University. Durham University.

Cooper, T., Pittman, A., & Womack, S. (2014). Using Reliability,

Validity, and Item Analysis to Evaluate a Teacher-Developed

Test in International Business. Evaluation and Testing

Research Article, 1-11.

Cummins, J. (2008). Reading Instruction and Reading Achievement

Among EL Students. Retrieved from

www.assest.pearsonglobalschool.com/assest_mgr/current

Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective Practices for

Developing Reading Comprehension. PBS Teacherline.

Eaves, S., & Erford, B. (2009, December 23). Item Analysis.

Retrieved from Education.com:

www.education.com/reference/article/item-analysis

Ellis, R. (2006, September). The Methodology of Task Based

Teaching. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8(3), 79-99.

Finch, A. (2014). Supplementing Secondary EFL Textbooks: A

Practical, Task-Based Methodology. Retrieved from

www.finchpark.com

Gardner, A., Tiwari, A., Davies, H., & O'Donoghue, M. (2002). Peer

Tutoring. Retrieved from www.ltrc.edc.polyu.edu.hk

Goodlad, S., & Hirst, B. (1989). Peer Tutoring: A Guide to Learning

by Teaching. Kogan .

Heaton, J. B. (1988). Writing English Language Tests. London:

Longman.

Hole, G. (2009, February). Research Skills. T-tests. Retrieved from

http://users.sussex.ac.uk/~grahamh/RM1web/t-

testHandout2009.pdf

Hoover, W., & Gough, P. (1990). Reading and Writing: An

Interdisciplinary. The Simple View of Reading, 2, 127-160.

Horn, R. A. (2016, May 18). Understanding the Independent Sample

T-test. Retrieved from Introduction to Statistics:

http://oak.ucc.nau.edu/rh232/courses/EPS525/Handouts/Unde

rstanding Independent Test.pdf

Hott, B., & Walker, J. (2012, April). Peer Tutoring. Retrieved from

Council for Learing Disabilities: http://www.council-for-

learning-disabilities.org

Hughes, A. (1998). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Human Resources and Social Development. (2003). Reading the

Future: A Portrait of Literacy in Canada. Retrieved from

Highlights from the Canada Report: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca

Jing, W., & MingJun, L. (2013). Studies in Second Language

Acquisition : Task Based Approach in Chinese EFL Teaching.

ICT for Language Learning(6).

Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. (2014). Materi Pelatihan

Guru Implementasi Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Badan

Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia Pendidikan dan

Kebudayaan dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan.

Kintsch, W. (1998). A Paradigm for Cognition . New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Koda, K. (2005). Insights into Second Language Reading. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Kurland, D. J. (2000). Critical Reading vs Critical Thinking.

Retrieved from www.criticalreading.com:

www.criticalreading.com

Lague, K. M., & Wilson, K. (2010). Peer Tutors Improve Reading

Comprehension. Kappa Delta Pi Record. Retrieved from

Kappa Delta Pi Record: www.eddigest.com

Lague, K. M., & Wilson, K. (2011, March). Peer Tutors Improve

Reading Comprehension. Education Digest, 56-58. Retrieved

from Kappa Delta Pi Record: www.eddigest.com

Lane, D. M. (2016). Difference Between Two Means (Independent

Groups). (Rice University) Retrieved from Online Statistics

Education: An Interactive Multimedia Course of Study:

http://onlinestatbook.com/2/tests_of_means/difference_means

.html

Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation Theory and The Improvement of

Teaching and Learning. Gothaburgensis: Acta Universitatis.

Matlock-Hetzel, S. (1997, January). Basic Concepts in Item and Test

Analysis. The Annual Meeting od The Southwest Education

Research Association.

McMillan, J. H. (2008). Educational Research: Fundamentals for the

Consumers. Virginia: Pearson Education,Inc.

Miller, M. J. (2000). Reliability and Validity. Graduate Research

Methods, 1-3.

Mueller, D. (1992). An Interactive Guide to Educational Research.

Allyn and Bacon.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-Based Language Teaching. Hongkok:

Cambridge University Press.

Ovwigho, B. (2013, December). Empirical Demonstration of

Techniques for Computing the Discrimination Power of a

Dichotomous Item Response Test. IOSR Journal of Research

and Met, 3(2), 12-17.

Oxford, R. (2006, September). Task-Based Language Teaching and

Learning: An Overview. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly,

8(3), 94-121.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools.

Retrieved from www.criticalthinking.org

Perfetti, C., Landi, N., & J.Oakhill. (2007). The Acquisition of

Reading Comprehension Skill. The Science of Reading: A

Handbook.

Pitchard, A. (2007). Studying and Learning at University: Reading

for Academic Purposes.

Pools-m. (2014). Task Based Learning. (E. Commission, Producer)

Retrieved from Education and Culture DG Lifelong Learning

Education Programme: www.languages.dk/archieve/pools-

m/manuals/final/taskuk.pdf

Puchta, H., Stranks, J., & Lewis-Jones, P. (2011). English in Mind

Student's Book 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rosenberger, J. (2016). Hypothesis Testing: Critical Value Approach.

(T. P. University, Producer) Retrieved from Statistics:

https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/statprogram/node/137

Sabri, S. (2013, Dec). Item Analysis of Students Comprehensive Test

for Research in Teaching Beginner String Ensemble Using

Model Based Teaching Among Music Students in Public

University. International Journal of Education and Research,

1, 6.

Salaberry, R. (2001). Task-Sequencing in L2 Acquisition. Texas

Papers in Foreign Language Education, 6(1), 101-112.

Salisbury University. (2009, September 9). 7 Critical Reading

Strategies. Retrieved from A Maryland University of

National Distiction:

http://www.salisbury.edu/counseling/New/7_critical_reading

_strategies.html

Salisbury University. (2009). Seven Critical Reading Strategies.

Retrieved from Salisbury University: www.salisbury.edu

Scruggs, T., Mastropieri, M., & Berkeley, S. (2010, December 9).

Peer Tutoring Strategies. Retrieved from education.com:

http://www.education.com/article/peer-tutoring/

Smith, N. (2016). What Are Some Advantages and Disadvantages of

Peer Tutoring? Retrieved from our everyday life:

http://oureverydaylife.com/advantages-disadvantages-peer-

tutoring-30102.html

Teijligen, E. R., & Hundley, V. (2001). The Importance of Pilot

Study. Social Research Update(35).

Topping, K., & Hill, S. (1996). The Effectiveness of Peer Tutoring in

Further and Higher Education: A Typology and Review of the

Literature. Springer Publisher.

Tse, Y. C. (2014, September 16). Child Mentor's Perception on

Developing in Primary School Peer Mentoring Programme of

Underprivileged Context. The University of Hong Kong,

Faculty of Education. Hong Kong: The University of Hong

Kong ( Pokfulam, Hong Kong). Retrieved from

http://hdl.handle.net/10722/202334

Vieitas, J. C. (2015, October 13). Student-Student Interaction and

Task Based Learning. Retrieved from Linked In :

https://www.linkedin.com/student-student-interaction-task-

based-learning

Walker, M. (2011). Task-Based Language Teaching: A Classroom

Framework. Research into Practice Conference, 1-13.

Willis, J. (1996). A Framework for Task-Based Learning. London:

Longman.

Woolley, G. (2011). Reading Comprehension: Assisting Children

with Learning Difficulties. Springer Science and Business

Media.

Autobiography

Sri Indrawati was born in Surabaya, June 5th, 1974 as the

second daughter from Drs. Haryono Kosasih, B.A. and Wong

See Joen. After she had graduated from St. Hendrikus Senior

High School in 1994, she continued her study in English

Education Department of Widya Mandala Catholic University

in 1994.

After graduating her Bachelor degree, she started her career

in teaching English for Senior High School students in YPPI

School for seven years. During her teaching career in YPPI

School, she had been nominated as the winner in instructional

media competition conducted by Microsoft Indonesia in 2004.

In 2008, she moved to Petra 3 Senior High School and she has

been teaching students in English Regular program and in

English Conversation program.

In 2012, she decided to continue her study by joining the

English Education Department of Graduate School in Widya

Mandala Catholic University, Surabaya. In her final exam, she

wrote a thesis entitled “A Comparison Study between Peer

Tutoring with QUICK Method and Task Based Method on

Reading Comprehension Achievement for Eleventh Graders”

as the requirement to pass her Master’s degree.